Bf 109 B/C/D vs. Polikarpov I-16 type 5/10

Discussions on all aspects of the Spanish Civil War including the Condor Legion, the Germans fighting for Franco in the Spanish Civil War.
durb
Member
Posts: 627
Joined: 06 May 2014, 10:31

Re: Bf 109 B/C/D vs. Polikarpov I-16 type 5/10

#16

Post by durb » 15 Jan 2015, 18:54

Some points. First the radio issue - the Bf 109 B/C/D of Legion Condor had in most cases no radio, although planes were sent with radio fitted. It was not considered of much value by Günther Lützow, who saw it as a extraweight and lessening the aerodynamics - so he removed it altogether and ordered to do the same thing for other Bf 109 B under his command (2.J/88). Also the Bf 109 D of Werner Mölders had no radio mast or antenna wires which can be seen from many photos. It was only when the Bf 109 E arrived, that radio equipment became standard but that happened very late from the point of view of SCW airwar. The Rotten und Schwarmen tactics were developed without the help of radio equipment.

Then coming to armament. The two rifle-calibre guns of Polikarpov I-16 type 5 shot almost mechanically forward - there was no harmonisation of guns so that the streams of bullets have met in say 100-150 meters having more impact. From the Finnish Winter War experience I have read that more than once Finnish pilots were saved because the mechanically forward firing wing guns of I-16 type 5 left between them blind spot where the fuselage and enemy pilot were. It was clearly unsatisfactory armament, which was improved with I-16 type 10 - the Supermosca. About the unsatisfactory gun armament of type 5 there were also many Soviet reports based on combat experiences in China against Japanese.

The third point is the dive capability. Again from Finnish Winter War experience it is known that I-16´s and specially type 5 were unsatisfactory as divers - they could not follow Fokker D XXI or Bristol Blenheim bomber in dive so the favourite Finnish tactics of Fokker and Blenheim pilots was to disengage by sharp dive which left effectively the I-16´s behind. Also some Soviet Winter War combat reports indicate that I-16 (type 5) was not a ideal plane for diving manouvers.

Now the fourth point considering the Soviet test results of Bf 109 B "6-15". All the photos that I have seen of this plane indicate that it was equipped with fixed Schwarz propeller, not with variable VDM Hamilton prop. - I´m quite sure that this to some degree affected the performance results, which with later Bf 109 B or Bf 109 D with VDM would have been improved in some extent. But how much, I can not tell.

Edit: and let´s not to forget the Revi gunsight of Bf 109 - I guess that it was somewhat better than the telescope of I-16 type 5.

babehunter1324
Member
Posts: 4
Joined: 04 Sep 2014, 20:19

Re: Bf 109 B/C/D vs. Polikarpov I-16 type 5/10

#17

Post by babehunter1324 » 24 Apr 2015, 13:21

VG 33 wrote:
durb wrote:The duel between Bf 109 and I-16 in Spain: technical specifications?

I would be interested to know the differencies of performance between Bf 109 B / D vs. Polikarpov I-16 types 5 and 10.

Although there have been many books on Legion Condor and "La Gloriosa", there appears to be quite limited technical information about their planes. One is forced to look more or less reliable web sources.
Hello

Might help?Image

The Me-109B-1 curve is from NII-VVS captured 6-15 trials, probably an early 109A model in fact, with certainly a low-altitude Jumo's supercharger.
The ME-109B-2's one from theoretical data, note also that from early I-16 M-25(tip 5) datasheet (not represented here), the speed is quoted at 420 SL and 460 at about 2,5-3 km.

Some discrepancy, i would say.
Anyway, even the small speed margin in favor of the 109 over the Mosca under 4 km taken only from the datasheets, is unproven. In the real life, it was rather the opposite: all 3rd mosca's squadron pilots i knew: Sanz, Bravo, Fierro told me (separatly) that the I-16 was (about 15-20 kph) faster at SL, equal at 3-4 km hight, and slower (15-20 kph) at about 5-6 km. Except for those using a smuggling american F-54 cyclone, of course...

Regards
Sorry for the necro

Thank you so much for that graph!
I had found data sheets analyzing it but never the original source.
That said I'm a bit skeptic about several data on the graph... the top speed of the BF-109E lower than 450 km/h at seal level? Maybe when running on MIL, certainly not while using WEP.

Comes to show that both fighters were rather well matched.

Now for a more general comment:

And as I said before the exchange ratio during the Spanish Civil War would probably be never accurately meassured. If there was already a huge air kill claim dissonance in WW2 and the Korea War when they were already gun camera's it could just only had been worse before those were used (if I recall correctly the Republicans claimed to down fourty "Messers" and as previosuly mentioned the Rebels claimed to shot down more I-15's than the total number that was used operationally).

Just compare the difference between the ammount of I-16's claimed to had been lost during accidents (around 80 out of about 200 lost) compared to the ones claimed for the BF-109's (around 20 for only 10 confirmed losses in air to air combat...) And the BF-109 was the "easier" plane to fly.

Maybe the reason why the Condor Lefion was so concerned on the modified Mosca's with a supercharged engine wasn't just becuase they're improved performance but also do the fact that their pilots were supplied with oxygen increasing their combat potential up high... Prolly a crazy theory.

As for the telescopic sight beign worse than the BF-109 reflector sight that's a given. But it got better when the I-16 series also got reflector sights.

Another one I found out rectly is that the I-16 Type 5 had slightly longer burst time than the BF-109B: (30 Seconds vs 25 Seconds). Not a great deal... I guess.


Post Reply

Return to “Spanish Civil War & Legion Condor”